Topic summary
49% 28 analyzed articles/videos 14,782 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Brooklyn results contain 50 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion , Framing Effect , and Biased Writer Voice , with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 11.5% saturation with 6,933 hits . Analysis detected 44,954 faulty-reasoning hits from 60,490 analyzed words across 28 articles, generating a BS Score of 1.5% and a BS Rank of 8% (14,815 of 15,988 topics). This Brooklyn is better (less manipulative) than 92.70% of the peer group. Brooklyn
Topic details
Total words: 60,490
Article count: 28
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed topics
7% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 7.3% percentile 1.5% BS Score28 analyzed articles60.5K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Topic 5.6% 5.6% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Topic 3.1% 3.1% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Topic 11.5% 11.5% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Topic 8.5% 8.5% In-Group Bias Sitewide 6.9% Topic 0.7% 0.7% Confirmation Bias Sitewide 7.5% Topic 2.3% 2.3% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Topic 4.1% 4.1% Overconfidence Bias Sitewide 4.6% Topic 0.4% 0.4% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Topic 4.0% 4.0% Optimism Bias Sitewide 6.0% Topic 1.9% 1.9% Sitewide departure map Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often
0.0% 0.0% 10% 10% 20% 20% 30% 30% 40% 40% 50% 50% Framing Effect: Topic 5.6%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Topic 11.5%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Topic 8.5%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Topic 3.1%, sitewide 11.1% Availability Heuristic: Topic 4.1%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Topic 4.0%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Topic 2.3%, sitewide 7.5% In-Group Bias: Topic 0.7%, sitewide 6.9% Halo Effect: Topic 3.2%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Topic 1.9%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Topic 4.4%, sitewide 5.3% Anecdotal: Topic 3.4%, sitewide 5.2% Overconfidence Bias: Topic 0.4%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Topic 0.5%, sitewide 3.7% Post Hoc (False Cause): Topic 2.3%, sitewide 3.3% Out-Group Homogeneity Bias: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 3.1% Fundamental Attribution Error: Topic 0.9%, sitewide 2.7% Recency Bias: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Topic 1.0%, sitewide 2.5% Unattributed Quote: Topic 2.4%, sitewide 1.1% Bandwagon: Topic 0.1%, sitewide 2.2% Status Quo Bias: Topic 0.6%, sitewide 2.2% Ad Hominem: Topic 0.2%, sitewide 2.2% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Topic rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst